Friday, January 08, 2016

In the early stage of a K-shift, while threat and harshness are still avoidable and deniable, there will be a period where splintering will occur among the right. As a result, some rightward individuals will cling to aspects of r which give them comfort, while trying to maneuver politically and for social reasons in directions other than the K-strategy, as the Cuckservatives of the US do. Other groups with amygdalae only partly trained to react to a single deviation from one aspect of the K-strategy will focus on one aspect of K, from family values and social conservatism, to nationalism, to demands for freedom from government oppression, each to the exclusion of the rest of the K-strategy. They may attempt to compromise, or reduce conflict stimuli on other aspects of K as a strategic move, driven by their amygdala’s obsessed focus.

As the apocalypse goes down, there will be a reversal of the splintering, leading the right to fuse, but this will only occur as violence and threat become undeniable and a necessity that must be addressed. If real violence and threat were actually present in everyone’s world now, the similar aspects of right-leaning ideologues would unite them as allies against the threat, overwhelming their amygdalae’s present drive to avoid conflict. It would be something which would be actively driven by a cognitive desire of the amygdala to alleviate more thoroughly the massive anxiety produced by the threat. As they say, there is nothing like common enemies.

If Muslims were going to start killing people in greater numbers to the point everyone felt vulnerable, PEGIDA would tightly and proudly ally with the other groups, to amplify their power and increase the ability of their mind to alleviate the angst produced by the threat. If rightward ideologues were conducting violent acts against enemies on a regular basis, and you were either with them or against them, this would also consolidate the K-strategists. Threat avoidance is a great rabbit motivator – far greater than morals.

That level of threat just has not arisen yet, but it will.

We're already starting to see some of this, as even Cuckservative Central has largely stopped virtue-signaling the Left and attacking the nationalists, and is beginning to start paying more attention to the threat being posed by the anti-nationalist traitors and the invaders.

You'll know the fusion is complete when the leading Alt Right figures start being given the sort of mainstream platforms from which their predecessors were expelled. Of course, the situation will probably have to be pretty dire by then.

This will be the year when your friends who don't know you are alt right start talking to you about the alt right. And you'll be like "Wait, no, you don't understand: I was cool before it was cool to be cool."

AC is correct. War horns, Helm Hammerhand style. Lots of them, war drums, snappy military dress. It's not for the invaders, who don't give a sh!t. It's for the natives. Rattle their teeth, flutter hearts and shake the bowels. Flip that primal amygdala switch.

The Time of Men is over. The Dawn of the Barbarian is near, will the Orc be driven back?

its interesting because we are already seeing this in the way people are admitting that Hungary's president had it right. The man was hated and reviled by the elites of europe but many are now begrudgingly admitting that he was correct.

@ Krul, from the link - "At a time when the well-known formulae of far-right xenophobia are threatening to become ... socially acceptable again in Europe, it is necessary to research and critically present the appalling driving forces of National Socialism and its deadly racism," Wirsching said.

It doesn't seem wise to attach xenophobia and racism (irrational fear/ prejudice) to something that is growing out of pure experience and observation.

All they will end up with is the idea that xenophobia and racism are perfectly justifiable ways to exist.

It doesn't seem wise to attach xenophobia and racism (irrational fear/ prejudice) to something that is growing out of pure experience and observation.

I was not racist until I meet enough non Asian minorities to prove reality was not what was seen on TV/ taught. Let jews keep doubling down on MUH HOOLOCOUST and everyone in Europe will agree with WWII soldiers that said "if I had known how things would turn out I would have put down my rifle and picked up a German phrase book"

its interesting because we are already seeing this in the way people are admitting that Hungary's president had it right. The man was hated and reviled by the elites of europe but many are now begrudgingly admitting that he was correct.

Turns out that when an mean evil bigot is all that stands between your women being raped, even goodthinkers will eventually support the mean evil bigot.

I have seen these things come to pass in my waking and sleeping dreams and visions. Personally, I would rather just do it and get it done. Now. I hate waiting for everyone else, but being so far ahead there isn't a lot else. I can prepare the way, in small ways. While reviled, even for seeing and knowing, I am actually respected. It's just that no one wants to get off their ass and do anything. Momentum, the easy life, and all that. Plus, no one wants to lose their place in line to defend the line itself... unless they have no choice.

It bugs me. I'd almost rather not put out what I see and sense otherwise. But... I just can't shut up. Still hoping one or another of the groups will shoot me in the back. I just seem to have no luck with death however. Annoying, all around. And, yet, I'm tickled pink by all of it still. *grins*

Personally, I would rather just do it and get it done. Now. I hate waiting for everyone else, but being so far ahead there isn't a lot else.

There is a lot to be said for this approach, one benefit being that the conflict is short and causes less damage. However, human nature being what it is, a lot of factors would have to converge simultaneously to make it happen.

Personally, I would rather just do it and get it done. Now. I hate waiting for everyone else, but being so far ahead there isn't a lot else.

There is a lot to be said for this approach, one benefit being that the conflict is short and causes less damage. However, human nature being what it is, a lot of factors would have to converge simultaneously to make it happen.

"This will be the year when your friends who don't know you are alt right start talking to you about the alt right. And you'll be like 'Wait, no, you don't understand: I was cool before it was cool to be cool.'"

Have been thinking along these lines lately. Think we need to add two existing ideas together to see reality a bit better. Take the Overton Window (mentioned outside the quoted bit) and "No Enemies to the Left" explore how they connect. Where one sits on the political spectrum within the Overton Window is not actually as important as which way one faces, and pretty much everyone within the Window (representing the range of views deemed socially acceptable) faces left, i.e. has no enemies to their near left but anything to their right is howling madness and enemy.

Pam and Hugo are outside the Window and currently are not viable, Sanders is right on the edge but is moving the Window to make himself respectable. But notice how the rest work. Because of the left facing, Pelosi can lead her Caucus while Jordan is an unknown sulking in the Freedom Caucus while a cuck like Ryan sit in the Speaker's chair. Jim Webb quickly realized that zero Democrats were interested in what he was offering. Leaders permit those to their Right to support them but only on condition they will have no voice, they being deemed 'crazy' (if on the Right of the Window) or insufficiently dedicated to the cause (if in the middle to slightly left of center).

It sounds like a better way to express the idea this article is driving at is that we need to start demanding No enemies to the Right out our leaders. This would provide the effect you seem to want, where the most extreme Right view quickly dominates the debate, those people assume leadership roles in the fight and this pulls the Overton Window back toward the Right.

I was not racist until I meet enough non Asian minorities to prove reality was not what was seen on TV/ taught.

non-Christian Asians are only marginally less antisocial, they are just doing it in less physically destructive manners. As their populations in the US increases they will be come just as untrustworthy, corrupt, and engage in just as much out group discrimination as they do in their home countries.

--

The elite are probably thankful that Americans don't give a crap about what happens outside the US. If the average American had even a passing interest in what was going on in the world, word of every day violence of Muslims would be impossible to contain.

Merkel doesn't just need to lose her job at this point, she needs to lose her life due to the suffering she has inflicted on her people.

non-Christian Asians are only marginally less antisocial, they are just doing it in less physically destructive manners. As their populations in the US increases they will be come just as untrustworthy, corrupt, and engage in just as much out group discrimination as they do in their home countries.

Lower class Vietnamese and Hmong can be real SOBs. They are as volatile as mestizos and Africans. The Arabs and Persians here (Nor Cal) are generally middle/upper class and don't get physical - kinda just uppity arses like Jewish folk.

Are you saying that racism IS a perfectly justifiable way to live? /gasp

While what I said was mostly tongue-in-cheek, I do recognize the biological tendency we have to be mildly suspicious of those not like you. Hasn't it been shown scientifically that babies are more atuned to fine features that help them recognize their family? And that this becomes more subconcious as we age.

However, I wouldn't call that racism like those commentors did. Even among my own race/counrtymen (even my own extended family!), I trust my immediate family the most.

Yet I am still inclined to believe what we call outright racism to be morally repugnant. And still I believe that VD's advice on country for people is the best way to appreciate our cultural differences and minimize "outright racist" occurences.

Thank you for this link. For the first time someone gives a plausable theory as to why feminists/governments would support the mass importation of potential rapists/criminals (aside from the BS of intersectional theory).

"This will be the year when your friends who don't know you are alt right start talking to you about the alt right. And you'll be like 'Wait, no, you don't understand: I was cool before it was cool to be cool.'"

Haha, too true. But it reminds me: I encourage anyone who feels the ability and calling to seek local leadership opportunities, whether in church, community politics, etc. A lot of people are going to start looking for local leadership. Be there for them when they do.

I think this has application to the Harney county occupation. we condemned Ammon Bundy as nuts. What I'm seeing on facebook is causing me to rethink. What Ammon has done is keep the news cycle focused on the Hammond's plight. More and more people are seeing and learning and asking questions. So Vox is right embrace the extremists. They are nuts but they get things done.

The Malheur WR occupation is a primary test for whether someone is a cuckservative. If they're 'concerned' or disagree with the timing or have other criticisms of the takeover, they're firing on our own side.The 4G response is to hold your tongue about any reservations, and to defend them where you honestly can, perhaps by pointing out the legitimacy of their grievances or the non-violence of their methods.

It's ridiculous for conservatives to talk about r/K when liberals are the ones who have very small numbers of children and coddle them incessantly.

You're interpreting r/K incorrectly. r-selection causes promiscuity and a lack of investment in one's offspring. Latrina and her 26 crack babies is one manifestation of this. The liberal affluent, SWPL young woman riding the cock carousel until she is 38 (at which point she chooses either catlady-dom or a test-tube baby) is another. The promiscuity is there for the SWPL, just as it is for the crack ho, but the SWPL can chemically prevent herself from getting pregnant.

Also, the "coddling" that r-selected people give to their offspring resembles the treatment one would give to a toy or to an accessory. (r-selected folks also tend to treat their pets the same way.)

You'll occasionally find the K-selected wealthy elite liberal, bearing one or two offspring and investing a lot of effort into them, but the policies they advocate for the underclass are often different from the practices they reserve for themselves. (K-selection for me but not for thee.)

Someone at work today mentioned the latest issue of Canada's national magazine "Macleans". The cover exhorted parents to regain control over their children.

My mind boggles at the blatant denial this leftist mouthpiece of Liberal Canada (baby-boomer-produced) displays. On the one hand it is spouting feminist go-girl philosophy, the other lamenting how our society is turning out so terribly.

The good thing was I was able to throw out some good AltRight comments to any and all within earshot. Control the narrative, dismiss hand-wringing mice.

It is a fact of human social existence. It isn't going away. The conversation at that link is light-years ahead of anything going on in "respectable" circles.

What's most pressing currently is recognizing the havoc wreaked by fundamentalist anti-racism and countering it, preferably on a strategic rather than merely tactical level.

"Yet I am still inclined to believe what we call outright racism to be morally repugnant. And still I believe that VD's advice on country for people is the best way to appreciate our cultural differences and minimize "outright racist" occurences."

What we call racism doesn't matter. The "content of one's character" consensus was shattered over a generation ago by those with far more power than you or I.

"With the advent of harm-based morality, the mechanics of group solidarity came under attack due to an obsession with dominant vs. subordinate group interaction. This moralizing targeted dominant group solidarity specifically, because of its tendency to harm the subordinate group (harm should be seen in the context of all group interaction, but this tends not to be the case). Weakened group solidarity, in combination with the formation of mass society, has dramatically increased the costs of organizational complexity, and calls into question our ability to sustain society in present form.

The evidence is all around us: greater surveillance, erosion of fourth amendment protections, historically high levels of criminal incarceration, decline in social relationships and levels of trust, militarization of police, criminalization of speech, etc. These are the costs we have been burdened with as group solidarity has come under attack.

This is, in effect, the result of the war on racism. Like many famous 'wars' on abstract concepts, it has mainly produced more of what it is attempting to eliminate. This is not to deny that real social problems provided its impetus--rather that the war is an ineffective remedy for a misdiagnosed problem. The true remedy lies in recognition of how group cohesion develops, what its needs are, and its very large role in reducing the costs of organizational complexity."

"the policies they advocate for the underclass are often different from the practices they reserve for themselves. (K-selection for me but not for thee.)"

This is more rule than exception. Like most Prog policy prescriptions: red in tooth and claw, but with plausible deniability built in, with the advocate of the policy herself the principal target of the denial.

People are not meat robots whose actions are determined by programming and stimuli. There is no theory of cause and effect that can accurately predict what people will do. People are moral agents who not only use moral thinking explicitly in their decision making, but also implicitly in that what they see and believe is heavily influenced by their moral stands.

@38 kfg At the risk of being accused of firing on our own side, I don't agree.The litmus test is whether their 'concerns' or disagreements make them think the Feds get a gift Waco.

Do you think your criticism has no effect if there is not a shooting battle lost by it? Every criticism of the right, by the right, makes the next person who's considering stepping out of line a little more reluctant. Did you see the Left criticising the Occupy encampments?

If you are the same, then I feel bad. If I'd known you've actually written a book, then I wouldn't have been so flip, as I respect that. Plus the real catnip is that I'm fascinated by this stuff, and, in portions of it, I have some fairly deep domain knowledge. (And, hi, Aeoli!)

Yup. Adding to what I posted up a bit earlier, No enemies to the Right. That means I might disagree on their tactics in that I probably won't do something similar or recommend it at this time, but those guys are on my team and I won't oppose them, attempt to undermine them and most certainly not by any word or deed provide moral/political cover for the Progs exterminating them.

We need to be a big movement, allowing various decentralized groups to try things; and we can then replicate the successes and learn from the failures. We should embrace them all though, even helping those who fail to quickly get refocused and developing and trying a new tactic. By making it clear they aren't fighting a hopeless battle alone we can encourage even people we aren't sure are doing the right thing but are at least fighting. They might be 'crazy' but if we treat them as 'our' crazies' we gain.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blogPlease do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.